His heart was visible, and the dismal sack that maketh excrement of what is eaten.

Join Date

Mar 2006

Posts

11,154

--

Originally Posted by Matt Phillips

Out of curiosity, have you obtained this rating yourself?

Nope. Like I said, I have less than 100 hours.

And I'm not making any statement one way or the other about the likelihood of any of these guys being able to accomplish what they supposedly did. I haven't watched the videos yet, so maybe some questions are answered in them. Are we sure that these other pilots did this simulation and couldn't do it or is that just what somebody said happened? Are the speeds fact or hearsay? Maybe the details are fucked up somewhere but the end result was that these guys flew the planes into the towers. I'll watch the videos before I speculate any further.

I'm painting him as someone with out the expertise to accomplish what was observed on 9/11. Veteran 737 pilots could only match this feat at speeds of 100-150 knots (ie: landing speed) in simulation. Al-Sheshhi had 2 days of 727 simulator training at a sketchy school, and a commercial pilot airplane license, and accomplished the WTC1 strike in a real plane (and a 767) at 447 knots near sea level.

Right and I am questioning your numbers, like you are questioning their "extent." 10s of hours is completely different than a minimum of 250 hours. You are coloring their training to reinforce what you saw in the video. I am just showing that there is more than the minimalism and "sketchy" training that you are asserting.

Do I think some things are hidden? Sure do. I also wouldn't put it past the FAA and the Government to purposely put out disinformation. I wouldn't want it known that a CPL license and a few hours on a 727 simulator, at a "sketchy school," enables you to turn planes into missiles.

I work around pilots that fly 737, 727, 767 and smaller jets. I'll ask them, tomorrow, what they think. Also, when you talk to them out of the public eye, you'd be AMAZED at what they say.

Things like:
"We are glorified bus drivers."
"Training is harder than the actual job."
"Take off and landing is the hardest."
"The computer does all of the work."

Things like this make me think yeah, they flew it after they made the pilots set them on course.

Right and I am questioning your numbers, like you are questioning their "extent." 10s of hours is completely different than a minimum of 250 hours.

I already said it could be in the 100's. Originally I only looked at one location, but they trained in several. In an earlier post I exhaustively list every single instance in which he received relevant training.

250+ hours flying tiny prop planes at 65 knots does not affect my point in the least.

Now darkness comes; you don't know if the whales are coming. - Royce Gracie

I already said it could be in the 100's. Originally I only looked at one location, but they trained in several. In an earlier post I exhaustively list every single instance in which he received relevant training.

250+ hours flying tiny prop planes at 65 knots does not affect my point in the least.

It's interesting to note that 6 months before 9/11, he had never been behind the controls of any airplane.

And I'm not making any statement one way or the other about the likelihood of any of these guys being able to accomplish what they supposedly did. I haven't watched the videos yet, so maybe some questions are answered in them. Are we sure that these other pilots did this simulation and couldn't do it or is that just what somebody said happened? Are the speeds fact or hearsay? Maybe the details are fucked up somewhere but the end result was that these guys flew the planes into the towers. I'll watch the videos before I speculate any further.

OK, watch the vids.

Now darkness comes; you don't know if the whales are coming. - Royce Gracie

Wait a minute! If the plane was flying so fast it would disintegrate, why didn't it disintegrate?

Either the speed to disintegration estimate for a Boeing 767 is wrong, or, if it is correct, then that can not be a Boeing 767. That's simple Logic.

If you do get a chance to watch the first vid, there are several angles where one can see the extremely stressful maneuver carried out before the plane hits the tower clearly. Does anyone have a problem with my assuming a maneuver like that would tend to destroy the plane before the power dive that EA990 experienced? Because UA175 was going faster at that moment, not slower.

Edit: 4:47 of the first video is a good angle on the maneuver.

Last edited by Matt Phillips; 1/29/2013 2:26pm at .

Now darkness comes; you don't know if the whales are coming. - Royce Gracie

His heart was visible, and the dismal sack that maketh excrement of what is eaten.

Join Date

Mar 2006

Posts

11,154

3

Matt, the problem with your point is if there is one hole in any of your assumptions, then the whole premise is suspect.

I think some of these so-called facts are unconfirmed at best and purely wishful thinking at worst. It took me about 3 minutes on Google to find other people having this discussion and commercial pilots who say a 767 could in fact exceed 450 knots at low altitude, at least a few times without breaking up.

This, to me seems like one of those times where the level of knowledge required to understand an issue for yourself is so high that it's probably best if we just admit we have no fucking clue.